> jbosstest is great, but they are not unit tests-- at
> least the ones I run.
> I think that fine grained unit tests can be a very
> useful form of
> communication between the original developer of a
> feature and the
You are right. The tests in jbosstests at the moment
are very coarse grained. Most test large areas of
functionality (conformance to the spec, load testing
the list goes on and on). All are worthy endeavors
but I think there may be a requirement for something a
bit more fine grained as you suggest.
You could go as far as mandating a unit test for each
class and each classes public method, but I'm not sure
that those tests should co-habitate with jbosstest...?
There was a suggestion on this thread somewhere that
inner classes be used to house the unit tests of those
classes... I'm not sure about that. My immediate
concern is now you have test code being shipped with
implementation code... Something I don't like about
that..?
cheers,
peter
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
